Patna High Court
Sushil MalikversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that bail may be granted where the seized narcotic quantity is below commercial quantity, the accused has a clean antecedent, and there is non‑compliance with Sections 50 and 57 of the NDPS Act, subject to prescribed conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Sushil Malik, was arrested on 1 October 2025 in connection with a case under Sections 21 and 22 of the NDPS Act for alleged possession of large quantities of various narcotic injections. The prosecution recovered a substantial amount of diazepam, Avil, promethazine, and Lupigesic injections, but the counsel argued that the quantity was below the commercial threshold and that the investigation failed to comply with Sections 50 and 57 of the NDPS Act. The petitioner also asserted a clean criminal record and claimed the allegations were fabricated. The Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail, but the court considered the low quantity, lack of statutory compliance, and the petitioner's antecedents. Consequently, the court granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, imposing conditions of cooperation, presence in court, and non‑tampering with evidence, while allowing the bail bond to be accepted without delay for verification.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to an accused under Sections 21 and 22 of the NDPS Act when the seized narcotic quantity is less than commercial quantity.
- Whether non‑compliance with Sections 50 and 57 of the NDPS Act warrants bail.
- Whether the petitioner's clean antecedent and alleged fabrication of charges justify bail.
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act — s. 21, 22, 37, 50, 57
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- Section 21
- Section 22
- commercial quantity
- clean antecedent
- narcotics
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1888 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-121 Year-2025 Thana- JOGBANI District- Araria
======================================================
Sushil Malik S/o Late Surendra Malik Resident of village- Jogbani Hatiya
Patti, ward no 11, Police station- Jogbani, District- Araria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ramesh Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shailendra Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 19-01-2026 Heard Mr. Ramesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for
the petitioner and Mr. Shailendra Kumar, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
01.10.2025 in connection with Jogbani P.S. Case No. 121 of
2025, F.I.R. dated 01.10.2025 for the offences punishable under
Sections 21 & 22 of the N.D.P.S. Act.
3. According to prosecution case, there is recovery of
Diazepam Injection 1333 pieces, Avil injection pieces,
Promethazine injection 1095 pieces, Lupigesic injection 1260
pieces (Each 2 ml.) and 124 pieces Doctor plus siring.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has clean antecedent and the allegation as alleged is
false and fabricated. It appears from the F.I.R. that altogether
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1888 of 2026(2) dt.19-01-2026
2/3
1333 piece of Diazepam Injection, 1705 pieces of Avil injection,
1095 pieces of Promethazine injection and 1260 pieces of
Lupigesic injection apart from 124 pieces Doctor plus siring
was also recovered from the house of the petitioner. Learned
counsel further submits that although the recovery has been
made from the house of the petitioner but the recovered
contraband is less than commercial quantity. So there is non
violation of section 37 of NDPS Act. There is non-compliance
of section 50 and 57 of NDPS Act. He further submits that the
police after investigation, submitted chargesheet against the
petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 01.10.2025.
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
and the fact that petitioner has clean antecedent, recovered
contraband is less than commercial quantity and there is non-
compliance of sections 50 & 57 NDPS Act, let the petitioner,
above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.
10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge-cum-
Special Judge, NDPS Act, Araria in connection with Jogbani
P.S. Case No. 121 of 2025, with the following conditions:
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1888 of 2026(2) dt.19-01-2026
3/3
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Ranjeet/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.